Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PSY 620P February 19, 2015.  Capacity for abstract, scientific thinking  Ability to operate on operations  Characterized by  Hypothetico-deductive.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "PSY 620P February 19, 2015.  Capacity for abstract, scientific thinking  Ability to operate on operations  Characterized by  Hypothetico-deductive."— Presentation transcript:

1 PSY 620P February 19, 2015

2

3  Capacity for abstract, scientific thinking  Ability to operate on operations  Characterized by  Hypothetico-deductive reasoning  Propositional thought  May not be a universal stage like previous stages  Many (well-educated) people do not reach this stage  Domain specificity based on expertise

4  Byrge, Sporns, & Smith  Cognition and behavior results from interconnected structural and functional brain networks  Changing brain connectivity causes AND results from developmental changes in behavior

5  Brain-Body-Behavior networks  Explain interaction between neural connectivity, behavior, sensorimotor experiences  “Actively select and create information that in turn modifies the brain’s internal structure”

6  Functional networks:  Remain connected even when not specifically engaged  Are constrained by structural connectivity

7  Structural networks: anatomical connections linking cortical and subcortical brain regions  Functional networks: Set of connections among brain regions derived by observing neural activity during tasks and rest

8 Brain Networks Behavior TIME

9  Example:  Pick up an object, hold, rotate, use object.  Visual information is generated that supports visual object recognition

10  Where does development come into play?  All aspects of the circular process change with time

11  Infants and precocious reaching experience:  Infants wore Velcro mittens  Early experience leads to increases in later visual attention to objects and oral exploration of objects

12  What are the clinical implications of this theory, if any?  Are there downsides to exposing infants to earlier-than-normal sensory input?

13  Hermann et al. (2009)  Good example of application of psychometric approach to studying intelligence  Interpretations of ▪ group differences vs individual differences and inter- correlations

14

15  Best fitting model for children  Hermann et al. (2009)

16  Best fitting model for chimpanzees

17  Hermann et al. (2009)  No support for “g” in either species  Is social cognition uniquely human? ▪ Humans have higher mean scores ▪ Unique & separable structure

18 Nisbett et al (2012)

19  Heritability is between  Varies based on SES for children  Higher in families with high SES  For low SES, more variability in IQ can be traced to the shared environment  Adoption studies show those in higher SES families do better than sibs with biological parents (12 point increase)  What are the implications for this???

20  Biological: Breast feeding increased IQ by 8 points  Due to fatty acids in breast milk?  Social: SES, Adoption, hearing more words (10 million word gap)  Race: African American parents spoke 20 million words less  Shared environment effects higher in childhood/adolescence than adulthood  Birth order (3 points) – More attention to older child?

21  SES again – High SES children increase in IQ over the summer, lose SES children decrease  Good preschool programs’ effects fade out by late elementary school  Still – adults in these programs more likely to graduate, own homes, etc…  Quality of teaching  Increases in working memory and EF

22  SES again – High SES children increase in IQ over the summer, lose SES children decrease  Good preschool programs’ effects fade out by late elementary school  Still – adults in these programs more likely to graduate, own homes, etc…  Quality of teaching  Increases in working memory and EF  Drugs and exercise have modest effects

23  The impact of industrialized nations

24  SES again – High SES children increase in IQ over the summer, lose SES children decrease  Good preschool programs’ effects fade out by late elementary school  Still – adults in these programs more likely to graduate, own homes, etc…  Quality of teaching  Increases in working memory and EF  Drugs and exercise have modest effects

25  Links between the PFC and performance on fluid reasoning tasks  PFC needed for solution of visuospatial reasoning  PFC less involved in tasks that require crystallized intelligence  No consistent neural pattern of activation in the brain for reasoning  WHY????

26  Battle of the sexes – Overall, similar levels of IQ  Women – better at verbal fluency and memory  Men – visuospatial abilities (as young as 3 months of age)  SATs – Boys score 1/3 SD higher than girls (unequal n problem)  Males more variable on both ends of the spectrum  Causes – biopsychosocial model

27  Racial differences due to environment…genetics and adoption studies support this  Stereotype Threat – robust findings  Asian differences may be due to culture and motivation

28  Working memory = fluid intelligence???  The Flynn effect  The concept of g  Self-regulation and self control  Stress on the CNS and attention  SO…where should we focus?

29  Nielsen & Tomaselli (2010)  Functional significance of imitation?  Why expect cultural differences in children’s tendency to overimitate?

30  Experiment 1  Participants  Tasks ▪ DVs  Conditions

31  Experiment 1

32  Experiment 2  Participants  Conditions  Interpretation

33 1. SES-related disparities in MA increase from 10 mos to 2yrs 2. General contribution of genes & environment  Heritability higher at age 2  SES moderates genetic contribution to MA change  Increasing heritability of MA in infancy most evident for high SES nTucker-Drob, E. M., Rhemtulla, M., Harden, K. P., Turkheimer, E., & Fask, D. (2011). Emergence of a Gene × Socioeconomic Status Interaction on Infant Mental Ability Between 10 Months and 2 Years. Psychological Science, 22(1), Tucker-Drob, E. M., Rhemtulla, M., Harden, K. P., Turkheimer, E., & Fask, D. (2011). Emergence of a Gene × Socioeconomic Status Interaction on Infant Mental Ability Between 10 Months and 2 Years. Psychological Science, 22(1), Fernandez

34 Kelly Shaffer

35  SES-related disparities widen over course of childhood  Cumulative environmental damage Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011 Heritability of Cognitive Ability = 50% in General Population 72% high SES families 10% low SES families Greater influence of genes Greater influence of environment

36  Yet unknown when in childhood Gene x SES effect begins to emerge  Youngest documented SES differences = 7 yo  Parenting differences related to SES:  Time spent with children: high SES > low SES  Sensitivity to children's signals: high SES > low SES Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

37 1. SES will be positively related to change in mental ability (SES x Age) Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011 Time Mental Ability

38 2. Genes will influence change in mental ability (Genes x Age) Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011 Time Mental Ability

39 3. There will be an interaction between SES and genes as related to change in mental ability (SES x Genes x Age) Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011 Time Mental Ability Time Mental Ability HIGH SESLOW SES

40  750 twin pairs from Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B)  Assessed at 10 months and 2 years old  Zygosity: Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

41  Mental Ability: Bayley Short Form-Research Edition (Mental Scale only)  SES: composite of  Paternal education  Maternal education  Paternal occupation  Maternal occupation  Family income Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

42  “SES-related disparities in mental ability emerge over the course of infant development”  SES was unrelated to mental ability at 10 mn  SES was related to change in mental ability from 10 mn to 2 yr Time Mental Ability Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

43  “Genes begin to play a role in the development of mental ability between 10 mn and 2 years” Time Mental Ability Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

44  “The extent to which genes influence mental development differs according to SES”  By 2 years: genetic influences on mental ability are larger among children from high SES vs. low SES Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011 Time Mental Ability Time Mental Ability HIGH SESLOW SES

45 Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

46  “Although SES is often conceived of as a purely environmental variable, socioeconomic groups may differ in the frequencies of specific genetic polymorphisms”  Are SES and genes confounding variables?  “We overinvest in most schooling and post-schooling programs and underinvest in preschool programs for disadvantaged persons”  Do you agree? Shaffer | Tucker-Drob et al., 2011

47 750 pairs of twins (from ECLS-B) Zygosity score o Monozygotic (MZ) o Dizygotic (DZ) Analytic Method o 2 latents: BSF-R initial (10mos) & change (10 mos to 2 yrs) o Regressed on MA Fernandez

48

49 Model 1 o 10 mos, SES not related to MA o MA increased dramatically between 10mos & 2yrs o Significant relation between SES & magnitude of change Model 2 o Effect of genes on mental ability increases over infant development Model 3… Fernandez

50 Effect of genes on mental ability increases over infant development in high SES case ( Tucker-Drob, et al.. (2011) Tucker-Drob, et al.. (2011)

51 Messinger  “It is in contrast to severe deprivation that enrichment shows its statistically significant effects.” ▪ Gottlieb & Blair, 2004

52  Rodent research: early experiences avert the deterioration of learning ability seen when rodents are reared in impoverished conditions  It is only in comparison to impoverished conditions that enrichment shows an influence  Exposure to enriched conditions after exposure to impoverished conditions does not matter Bell

53 Messinger From about 27 days of age to 100 days of age: (1)a stovepipe cage (little motor or visual experience), (2)an enclosed running wheel (motor activity but little variation in visual experience), (3)a mesh cage restricted motor activity but variation in visual experience as cage moved daily in lab. (4) large free environment box – socially and physically stimulating

54 Its early experience that’s important Free environment/ Stovepipe Stovepipe/ Free environment Free environment/ Free environment Normal Cage/ Normal Cage Table 2. Mean Errors in Hebb-Williams Maze of Rats With Different Early and Late Environmental Experiences Note. Data from Hymovitch (1952). The Stovepipe/Free Environment and Normal Cage groups made significant more errors than the other two groups (p <.001). Bell

55  Gottlieb & Blair (2004)  Summary of impact of environmental variation in later learning in rodents ▪ Role of experience type ▪ Role of timing

56 Messinger  Birth – 5 years: “comprehensive educational daycare intervention”  “utilized developmentally appropriate curricula designed to facilitate children’s language, motor, social, and cognitive growth. ▪ Full-day care, 50-weeks per year, 93% enrolled by 3 months  5 – 8: “school age intervention delivered through home visitors, liaisons between home and school.  designed to increase parent involvement in the educational process

57  Gottlieb & Blair (2004) (cont)  Applications to Early Intervention ▪ The Abecedarian Project ▪ Multiple risks ▪ Low parental education ▪ Low income ▪ Father absence ▪ Unstable work history ▪ Family members with low IQ ▪ History of social service contacts ▪ Family history of school failure and psychopathology (Ramey & Campbell, 1984)

58  Gottlieb & Blair (2004) (cont) ▪ The Abecedarian Project ▪ Daycare Intervention (birth – 5 years) vs. no treatment ▪ School age home-visiting intervention vs. no treatment ▪ Random assignment to each = 4 conditions Ramey & Campbell, 1984

59 Messinger 1. Early daycare intervention (birth – 5) with follow through services to 8 years 2. Only the educational daycare intervention 3. Only the school age follow through 4. An untreated control group.

60 Messinger

61

62  Gottlieb & Blair (2004) (cont) Short-term Effects of Early Intervention on IQ Longer-term Effects of Early vs. Later Intervention

63 Messinger

64  Gottlieb & Blair (2004) (cont) ▪ Longer term effects of Early & Later Intervention on Academic Achievement

65

66  Gottlieb & Blair (2004) (cont)  Interpretations? ▪ Species-typical development vs. enriched development

67 Hermann et al Ni Sun-Suslow

68 1. Compare experimentally constituted groups on some cognitive task. ▪ Individual differences = “error variance” 2. Analysis of individual difference and their intercorrelations (Sternberg, 1999, 2004). ▪ Look for underlying factors that might be responsible for individual variation in cognitive performance on multiple cognitive tasks. Ni Sun-Suslow

69  Study comparing cognitive performance on chimpanzees, orangutans, and 2-year-old humans on a wide-ranging battery of cognitive tasks:  All species has same basic cognitive skills in physical domain  Human children showed more skills in social domain Ni Sun-Suslow

70 Hypothesis: Children would show a distinct factor for social intelligence, whereas chimpanzees would not. Population: ChimpanzeesHumans N Ages3-21 years2.5 years Females50% (ethnicity?)Uganda, Republic of CongoMostly German Ni Sun-Suslow

71  Primate Cognition Test Battery (PCTB)  3-5 hour battery  Chimpanzees tested in familiar room, humans tested in laboratory accompanied by parent Ni Sun-Suslow

72 Mean Proportion (SD) of correct responses by Chimpanzees and Human Children Ni Sun-Suslow

73

74 CFA model based on Tomasello & Call (1997)’s theoretical analysis of primate cognition. Ni Sun-Suslow

75

76

77

78

79  What are you thoughts on the experimental design? Could there be any confounding variables that were not addressed in the article?  What do the results from this study tell us about individual differences in human children vs. chimpanzees? Ni Sun-Suslow


Download ppt "PSY 620P February 19, 2015.  Capacity for abstract, scientific thinking  Ability to operate on operations  Characterized by  Hypothetico-deductive."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google